Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Carsten Gehling <alvion@****.UNI2.DK>
Subject: Year of Earthdawn
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 07:42:47 +0100
> would use a base number of 3 plus Initiate Grade versus magicians, and
> initiate grade versus Force for spirits. In other words, it can be done,
> but you've gotta be one hell of a high level initiate to do it
> effectively. And no matter what, an untended ward is still gonna zap you.

Well, the rules for Assensing really need to be beefed up. To me,
Masking makes sense /mostly/ because it's not innately obvious whether a
certain person is a mage or mundane; the exact levels of "auraness"
change from individual to individual. (To respond to a question in
another thread -- first you've gotta see the spell, then you've gotta
assense it to figure out what type of spell it is; then you gotta put
the pieces together).

As far as masking -- well, I'm one of those s
Message no. 2
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Year of Earthdawn
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 11:41:45 +0100
> Is it possible to drive a VCR-only vehicle (no manual control) using
> only a datajack? I have always assumed it's not possible, but since
> Adam J thought this could be done... well... I'm not sure anymore.

I'd imagine you have to have either hardware or software emulating the
VCR rig; once that's taken care of (and it would probably be taken care
of by the rigging gear built into the vehicle), everything would be in
the clear. No bonuses, of course :)

You could also encrypt the rigging circuitry, to prevent just-anyone
from plopping down in the driver's seat and peeling rubber. Keeps
go-gangers from heisting your truck' also keeps the sam from taking over
the driving needs after the rigger gets shot up.


-Mb
=========================================================================
Date: Sun, 4 Jan 1998 23:12:15 EST
Reply-To: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
Sender: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
From: Ereskanti <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Organization: AOL (http://www.aol.com)
Subject: Re: Halley's Comet (OT)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 98-01-04 22:23:57 EST, t_berghoff@*********.NETSURF.DE
writes:

> > You would turn me into a flaming pile of ash
Message no. 3
From: AirWisp <AirWisp@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Year of Earthdawn
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 08:36:28 EST
Cobra.

E-mail adress : wgallas@*****.fr
Quote : "Never trust an elf"
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 05:47:42 -0600
Reply-To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
Sender: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
From: Wyrmy <elfman@*****.NET>
Subject: Re: Halley's Comet (OT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> hihihi, Barriers wouldn`t help you ar all :):)
>

What Do you mean? I have every barrier from stop spirit,to stop
shapeshifter, to stop water.
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 13:13:48 +0100
Reply-To: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
Sender: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
From: Barbie <barbie@**********.COM>
Organization: Affilated Artists
Sub
Message no. 4
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Year of Earthdawn
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 16:30:40 +0000
That's it and the optical sighting and smart links of the SR universe
make seeing things at extream ranges not only possible but likely...
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 08:17:50 -0600
Reply-To: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
Sender: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
From: s c rose <scrose@****.COM>
Organization: @**** Network
Subject: Re: Sniper rifles
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Damon Harper wrote:
>
> >But, that *is* how the military uses snipers. One Shot, One Kill. And
> >then get the hell out of Dodge.
>
> That's part-true. But let's remember the military isn't the only ones
> to use snipers. How about law-enforcement? They may use them to
> neutralize a target, but they also use to cover the people that are
> already there.

LEO's misuse the term sniper what a (Law enforcement officer)
Message no. 5
From: Damon Harper <nomad74@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Year of Earthdawn
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 12:00:07 PST
And verily, did Gurth hastily scribble thusly...
|
|Barbie said on 3:05/ 5 Jan 98...
|
|> At 04-Jan-98 wrote Russ Myrick:
|>
|> >Prelude:
|> >[BIG snip]
|>
|> Ok, what should this supose to be, he?
|
|Please explain to me why Russ' post deserves a thwap? It was
|Shadowrun-related, it wasn't some kind of silly or stupid remark or
|question, and it wasn't an attempt to start a flame war either.

Come on Gurth. You know what happened with the Tea, last time, don't you....
:)

I think it's because people are more used to ShR fiction going to the tk
list, and rules discussions going here....
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
|Principal Subjects in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|Comp Sci & Electronics | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
Message no. 6
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: Year of Earthdawn
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 13:04:48 -0700
On Sun, 4 Jan 1998, AirWisp wrote:

> RAM would work on the standard signature for a submarine against normal
> sensors .. so would this mean that submarines could use something called SAM
> (Sound Absorbent Materials) to make them much more stealthier ? What would
> this material be based upon ? Very advanced foam rubber ?

Dont know what the material is based on (Top Secret im sure:)) but many
current USN submarines are covered with Acoustical Tile wich is suposed to
help absorb sonar pulses. I doubt it does much for radient sound but it
does cut back on the reflected sound from an active sonar ping. The
radient sound is where the smart materials would come in handy. In
current submarines they put the engines and other big vibration producing
parts on decks that are isolated from the hull by big springs ect. Smart
materials would alow you do do a much better job of isolating the
vibration from hull by generating counter waves to damp it out. Probaly
good for dynamic changes to the hull to decrese flow noise (which SHOULD
have a side effect of decresseing drag) as well. Of course its all moot
if you can track below the ambient. IE track the sub by the silent hole
it makes in the ambient sound of the sea. S
Message no. 7
From: "Leszek Karlik, aka Mike" <trrkt@*****.ONET.PL>
Subject: Re: Year of Earthdawn
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 22:08:46 +0000
>Don't know why you did that.
>Barsaive is located so
Message no. 8
From: Damon Harper <nomad74@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Year of Earthdawn
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 14:09:08 PST
I think that's the one...

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
|Principal Subjects in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|Comp Sci & Electronics | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
=========================================================================
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 11:09:31 -0500
Reply-To: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
Sender: Shadowrun Discussion <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
From: Les Ward <lward@*******.COM>
Message no. 9
From: Max Rible <slothman@*********.ORG>
Subject: Re: Year of Earthdawn
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 14:19:36 -0800
Gurth said
>Zixx said on 23:50/ 4 Jan 98...
>> For mana-spells, yes. But a powerbolt of fireball is resisted with armor. I
>> don't know why they wrote in the Grimoire that armor doesn't help, but a
>> fireball hardly comes from the inside of a target.

>Fireballs do come from inside the target, just like any other combat
>spells. If you want a fireball that attacks from the outside, you need to
>design a manipulation spell that does much the same as the current
>Fireball spell in SRII and the Grimoire. Combat spells always destroy
>their targets from the inside, and just the fact that Fireball sets fire
>to them doesn't mean it has to attack from the outside IMHO.

As always, Gurth is totally correct. One thing that used to bother me is
that a fireball combat spell and the manipulation Gurth mentions would have
the same drain code. (At least I think they would, I haven't designed
spells in quite a while.) This seems sort of unfair, as the combat spell
ignores armor and the manip does not; however, the other major difference
between the two is that the target numbers are much different. The combat
spell targets Body, while the manipulation spell has a fixed target of 4.
You can easily create scenarios where either spell is "better" than the
other.

One other difference, though it is probably debateable. Theoretically, if
you view the combat spell as a pow
Message no. 10
From: "Leszek Karlik, aka Mike" <trrkt@*****.ONET.PL>
Subject: Re: Year of Earthdawn
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 1998 23:23:59 +0000
The sticky point in this analysis is that both spells have the same damage
code. It seems like the combat spell should do the powerball-like damage,
then some fire damage. To rationalize this, it seems to me like you can do
three things:

1) Do NOT treat a combat fireball as "a powerball with fire side-effects",
but rather a fireball from inside the target.

2) Have the combat spell version to bother powerball and fire effect damage.

3) Consider the manipulation to produce much hotter, longer fire.

I've always used 3, mainly because it gives a stylistic difference to the
two spells. Style matters.

Wordman

"People forget that _Playboy_ has published every important modern writer.
They cannot see the forest for the tease."
-- Ray Bradbury

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Year of Earthdawn, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!